Leaps of faith for Philippine higher education
Anyone visiting the leading North American universities, whether as a student or as a benchmarker, is likely to be struck by the number and sheer magnitude of differences between these institutions and ours. Resources, research output and quality, physical and digital infrastructure, industry and international linkages—comparing any one of these might be enough to send a university president home, curled up in quiet despair.
The truth is that Philippine higher education is likely where it ought to be, given what we have collectively invested in it as a society (including what we’ve invested in pre-school and K-12). Where else should we expect it to be, given the market and regulatory conditions we set for ourselves and now work within? What outcomes can we credibly expect, given how responsive (or obstinate) we have been to the changing needs of our students and industry? No one should be surprised at findings from the Labor Force Survey that an astonishing percentage of low-skill, low-wage workers actually hold college degrees. Or that among the over 2,000 degree-granting institutions in the Philippines, only three or four figure regularly in research-intensive global rankings. Or that the “most internationalized” universities in our country report a mere 5 percent of their student pool coming from abroad.
When a university like Northeastern in Boston can succeed in offering cooperative education as a unique differentiator, you realize it is more than just a question of resources. Cooperative education allows all students, regardless of degree, to experience three six-month full-time placements (“co-ops”) at any of hundreds of partner companies, research centers, or nonprofits, across all seven continents—before they graduate. This means at least three semesters in which students carry no other academic load.
Yes, one must invest in networking, in setting up the online artificial intelligence-driven portal through which a student might select available job postings, and in quality-assuring the outcomes. But even before the resources were raised, those involved had to take collective leaps of faith. Legislators and regulators had to be persuaded to rethink the number of classroom hours mandated for a degree. They had to reevaluate minimum course content—or at least trust the institution enough to allow it to experiment and show proof of concept. Instructors had to believe that maybe the purpose of, say, an economics degree is not to produce professional economists per se, but to develop a set of core transferable skills using economics as a sandbox. Industry partners had to believe that students would be capable of doing nontrivial work. University leaders had to believe that the market for talent in the 21st century is indeed global, and worth the effort in dealing with the risks of off-state or even overseas placements.
When a university like Arizona State can grow to 145,000 students attending classes, with more than 62,000 of them attending virtually through over 300 online degrees and certificates, you again realize that resources are necessary, but perhaps not ultimately decisive.
Yes, you need to subscribe to a learning management system (they use Canvas, as many of us do), and a comprehensive information technology infrastructure. But again, accreditors, deans, senior professors, parents, and human resource recruiters all had to be willing to take a chance that a properly designed online degree could have as much, if not more value than its traditional counterpart. That an online class would not simply consist of a series of uploaded videos or slide decks. They had to believe it was possible to offer biomedical engineering, electrical and software engineering, material and sustainable engineering, even mechanical engineering as online degrees. They had to believe that it was possible to approximate, if not replicate, some of the most valuable aspects of a university education: formation, leadership training, socialization, and collaboration.
The initial shock, awe, and despair lasted but a moment; throughout our five days traveling together, I saw enough sparks of recognition and resolve from fellow university presidents, members of the Second Congressional Commission on Education (EdCom II), and Congress. Nobody doubts the enormity of the challenges ahead of us. Philippine education is where it is because of severe under-investment, even relative to our Asean neighbors. But it needs fresh ideas which all of us are gifted with, just as much as it needs more resources.
Oh, for a few leaps of faith.
—————-
Br. Bernard S. Oca FSS is president of De La Salle University. He joined EdCom II’s executive benchmarking visit to the United States in April 2024.
